Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal Case Shots is built to help you quickly identify and understand relevant precedent. For citation in pleadings or filings, always verify against the full judgment PDF and current citation format (e.g., 2026 INSC ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

The holding is what the court legally decided. The lesson learnt translates that into a practical takeaway: what a lawyer should factor into case strategy or client advice as a result of this precedent.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

Both. Each case shows a distilled summary (case type, key holding, and lesson learnt) and links to the full judgment as a PDF for when you need the complete text for research or citation.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

Yes. Use Advanced Filters to narrow results by decision date and by practice area, including Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service & Administrative Law, Family Law, Civil Property & Inheritance, and Labour & Industrial Law.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

Yes. You can filter judgments by the judge or bench that decided the case, which is useful for tracking how a particular judge has reasoned on similar issues across multiple rulings.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

Legal Case Shots is a searchable database of Supreme Court of India judgments, each broken down into the case type, the court's key holding, and a practical lesson learnt, with the full judgment available as a PDF for citation or deeper reading.

Criminal LawSupreme Court of India

Munu Sen v. The State of Chhattisgarh

Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 780Decided 29 Jul 2026
Crl.A. No.-001615-001615 - 2019
Justice J.B. Pardiwala · Justice K. Vinod Chandran

Background

A passerby found a dead body near a temple pond, and the post-mortem confirmed the death was homicidal, caused by multiple bleeding wounds. The appellant, son-in-law of the deceased's foster parents, was convicted by the Trial Court and the conviction was upheld by the High Court, relying solely on the "last seen together" theory as testified by four prosecution witnesses (two of whom had first been declared hostile).

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court found the last-seen evidence unreliable and insufficient on its own to sustain a murder conviction, noting settled law that a conviction cannot rest merely on the last-seen theory without further incriminating circumstances connecting the accused to the crime. Reviewing the judgments of the Trial Court and Appellate Court, the Bench found no reason to sustain the conviction. The Court acquitted the appellant, who had already been released on remission, and directed that any bonds executed for that release stand cancelled.

Lesson Learnt

A criminal conviction, especially for a grave offence like murder, cannot be based only on witnesses claiming the accused was "last seen" with the victim. Courts require additional, credible corroborating evidence before convicting.

Munu Sen v. The State of Chhattisgarh – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware